User Tag List

Page 62 of 104 FirstFirst ... 125258596061626364656672 ... LastLast
Results 733 to 744 of 1245

Thread: Obama Euphoria Ends

  1. #733
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,254
    Threads
    6
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Zeebadee View Post
    Yeah, like all those bombs and terrorist attacks that were happening in Iraq before we brought order and democracy to their war-torn country. Amazing how hated saddam was back then, yet still able to walk among public crowds for photo-ops without a single bomb or gunshot going off. I'd like to see Obama try doing the same in Montgomery, Alabama. How lucky the Iraqi people were that the U.S. got rid of the culture that controlled old blood feuds and religious hatreds, keeping the people from killing each other. What a great triumph for democracy when saddam was tried and convicted for wantonly killing thousands of his own people. And what a model we are for these lucky people when bush does not only the same to his people, but hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis as well.

    Why can't these people understand that we don't want to dominate them, we only ask that they sell us their oil cheap, and do what we tell them?? If they would merely agree with what we decide for them, why, we could have peace tomorrow! Why can't they understand that the U.S. has troops stationed at more than 800 installations in at least 135 countries because we simply want to be friends, not because we have any desire to dominate.?

    The largest empire in the history of the world, just to help other countries, and it seems we get no thanks at all.
    When Saddam was in power if one of his sons saw a wedding they'd kidnap the bride and rape her. Sometimes they killed her. Saddam the Benevolent ordered the deaths of at least 200,000 Shiites and around 50,000 Kurds. He gased the Kurds. He shot the Shiites, or buried them alive. He poured millions of gallons of oil into the Red Sea. He set the oil wells in Kuwait on fire defiling the atmosphere. He established terrorists training camps were established in Iraq. He attacked Iran and a million men were killed many gased. He invaded Kuwait causing them to cry for our aid, which we gave. Saddam had a political enemy of his slowly crushed beheath a steam roller with his family forced to watch. He threw people in garbage choppers. If one of his staff said something he didn't like he'd slowly walk behind the man and shoot him in the head.

    Yeah, Saddam was good for Iran.....yeah, right.


  2. #734
    blasphemer grandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,748
    Threads
    603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Deadeye View Post
    When Saddam was in power if one of his sons
    saw a wedding they'd kidnap the bride and rape her.
    Sometimes they killed her.
    Evidence? Not saying it didn't happen, but any such claim should be paired with evidence.
    Anyway, the US government supported Saddam right through his worst crimes, and only later made a major re-calculation in how it allocates resources.

    Grandpa h.

    Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.

  3. #735
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,254
    Threads
    6
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: grandpa View Post
    Evidence? Not saying it didn't happen, but any such claim should be paired with evidence.
    Anyway, the US government supported Saddam right through his worst crimes, and only later made a major re-calculation in how it allocates resources.

    Grandpa h.
    Oh gosh, it's been years since I read those articles. I can't even recall the kid's names. Yaaki and uki? Can't recall. But if you can remember their names just google their names and "rape of brides in Iraq" and I'll bet you'll get a hit.

    At the time such behavior by Saddam's sons was all over the news. So was his putting people into garbage chippers. Ever seen one of those things? Big rotating knives and choppers reduce office chairs to little chips. People too. The experience must have been terrifying.


  4. #736
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,009
    Threads
    136
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Deadeye View Post

    Yeah, Saddam was good for Iran.....yeah, right.
    Uh, saddam was in Iraq.

    I upped my income, up yours.

  5. #737
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,254
    Threads
    6
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Zeebadee View Post
    Uh, saddam was in Iraq.
    aahhh; I was reading my map upside down and backwards.


  6. #738
    Do you have a T-51b?
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Indiana- corn and meth labs
    Posts
    715
    Threads
    10
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, uh those millions of Iranians and Kurd's killed?

    That was done with our blessing.

    The Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988) was one of a series of crises during an era of upheaval in the Middle East: revolution in Iran, occupation of the U.S. embassy in Tehran by militant students, invasion of the Great Mosque in Mecca by anti-royalist Islamicists, the Soviet Union's occupation of Afghanistan, and internecine fighting among Syrians, Israelis, and Palestinians in Lebanon. The war followed months of rising tension between the Iranian Islamic republic and secular nationalist Iraq. In mid-September 1980 Iraq attacked, in the mistaken belief that Iranian political disarray would guarantee a quick victory.

    The international community responded with U.N. Security Council resolutions calling for a ceasefire and for all member states to refrain from actions contributing in any way to the conflict's continuation. The Soviets, opposing the war, cut off arms exports to Iran and to Iraq, its ally under a 1972 treaty (arms deliveries resumed in 1982). The U.S. had already ended, when the shah fell, previously massive military sales to Iran. In 1980 the U.S. broke off diplomatic relations with Iran because of the Tehran embassy hostage crisis; Iraq had broken off ties with the U.S. during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

    The U.S. was officially neutral regarding the Iran-Iraq war, and claimed that it armed neither side. Iran depended on U.S.-origin weapons, however, and sought them from Israel, Europe, Asia, and South America. Iraq started the war with a large Soviet-supplied arsenal, but needed additional weaponry as the conflict wore on.

    Initially, Iraq advanced far into Iranian territory, but was driven back within months. By mid-1982, Iraq was on the defensive against Iranian human-wave attacks. The U.S., having decided that an Iranian victory would not serve its interests, began supporting Iraq: measures already underway to upgrade U.S.-Iraq relations were accelerated, high-level officials exchanged visits, and in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of states supporting international terrorism. (It had been included several years earlier because of ties with several Palestinian nationalist groups, not Islamicists sharing the worldview of al-Qaeda. Activism by Iraq's main Shiite Islamicist opposition group, al-Dawa, was a major factor precipitating the war -- stirred by Iran's Islamic revolution, its endeavors included the attempted assassination of Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz.)

    Prolonging the war was phenomenally expensive. Iraq received massive external financial support from the Gulf states, and assistance through loan programs from the U.S. The White House and State Department pressured the Export-Import Bank to provide Iraq with financing, to enhance its credit standing and enable it to obtain loans from other international financial institutions. The U.S. Agriculture Department provided taxpayer-guaranteed loans for purchases of American commodities, to the satisfaction of U.S. grain exporters.

    The U.S. restored formal relations with Iraq in November 1984, but the U.S. had begun, several years earlier, to provide it with intelligence and military support (in secret and contrary to this country's official neutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President Ronald Reagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward the Middle East.

    By the summer of 1983 Iran had been reporting Iraqi use of using chemical weapons for some time.
    The Geneva protocol requires that the international community respond to chemical warfare, but a diplomatically isolated Iran received only a muted response to its complaints [Note 1]. It intensified its accusations in October 1983, however, and in November asked for a United Nations Security Council investigation.

    The U.S., which followed developments in the Iran-Iraq war with extraordinary intensity, had intelligence confirming Iran's accusations, and describing Iraq's "almost daily" use of chemical weapons, concurrent with its policy review and decision to support Iraq in the war [Document 24]. The intelligence indicated that Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces, and, according to a November 1983 memo, against "Kurdish insurgents" as well [Document 25].

    What was the Reagan administration's response? A State Department account indicates that the administration had decided to limit its "efforts against the Iraqi CW program to close monitoring because of our strict neutrality in the Gulf war, the sensitivity of sources, and the low probability of achieving desired results." But the department noted in late November 1983 that "with the essential assistance of foreign firms, Iraq ha[d] become able to deploy and use CW and probably has built up large reserves of CW for further use. Given its desperation to end the war, Iraq may again use lethal or incapacitating CW, particularly if Iran threatens to break through Iraqi lines in a large-scale attack" [Document 25]. The State Department argued that the U.S. needed to respond in some way to maintain the credibility of its official opposition to chemical warfare, and recommended that the National Security Council discuss the issue.

    Soon thereafter, Donald Rumsfeld (who had served in various positions in the Nixon and Ford administrations, including as President Ford's defense secretary, and at this time headed the multinational pharmaceutical company G.D. Searle & Co.) was dispatched to the Middle East as a presidential envoy. His December 1983 tour of regional capitals included Baghdad, where he was to establish "direct contact between an envoy of President Reagan and President Saddam Hussein," while emphasizing "his close relationship" with the president [Document 28]. Rumsfeld met with Saddam, and the two discussed regional issues of mutual interest, shared enmity toward Iran and Syria, and the U.S.'s efforts to find alternative routes to transport Iraq's oil; its facilities in the Persian Gulf had been shut down by Iran, and Iran's ally, Syria, had cut off a pipeline that transported Iraqi oil through its territory. Rumsfeld made no reference to chemical weapons, according to detailed notes on the meeting [Document 31].

    Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad in late March 1984. By this time, the U.S. had publicly condemned Iraq's chemical weapons use, stating, "The United States has concluded that the available evidence substantiates Iran's charges that Iraq used chemical weapons" [Document 47]. Briefings for Rumsfeld's meetings noted that atmospherics in Iraq had deteriorated since his December visit because of Iraqi military reverses and because "bilateral relations were sharply set back by our March 5 condemnation of Iraq for CW use, despite our repeated warnings that this issue would emerge sooner or later" [Document 48]. Rumsfeld was to discuss with Iraqi officials the Reagan administration's hope that it could obtain Export-Import Bank credits for Iraq, the Aqaba pipeline, and its vigorous efforts to cut off arms exports to Iran. According to an affidavit prepared by one of Rumsfeld's companions during his Mideast travels, former NSC staff member Howard Teicher, Rumsfeld also conveyed to Iraq an offer from Israel to provide assistance, which was rejected
    Damning isn't it?

    The National Security Archive

    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
    – George Bernard Shaw

  7. #739
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,365
    Threads
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When the Muslims had empires that ruled over non-Muslims and they had every opportunity to use state power to slaughter non-Muslims, they did not.

    I...you know... read. I search out information on subjects and educate myself. I read books about the founding of Israel, I read books about the Crusades, I read books about the history of Iraq and Iran, I read books about the history of the ideology behind the 9/11 terrorists.
    If you have read about Muslim history, then you will know they are not famous for their tolerance of 'infidels' which they have slaughtered wholesale in the past (Armenia, for example). Under Ottoman rule people were classified based on their religious faith and recognized with differing levels of rights and obligations, people who were not Muslim had to pay extra taxes. Spain, which was occupied by Muslims for 8 centuries saw all sorts of depravity visited upon them by the Moors, churches were destroyed and converted into mosques. In southern Spain, in order to improve one's lot, one became a 'Mozarabe' (converted), and this way could sell goods and provide services to the authorities, otherwise it was forbidden.

    Muslim history, like someone well versed in the matter as you are knows, features a series of what they called "jihads" through which Islam was spread. During what they call their first jihad, Islam spread from Meccah and Medina across the entire Arabian peninsula, all the way to what is now Israel and and Turkey. During their second jihad, Islam spread along North Africa and into Spain, there were incursions in other parts of Europe. In their third jihad Islam went east all the way to the Philippines. In all of these jihads the fundamental premise was that if a Moor was killed in battle against an infidel, he was assured exactly what Al Qaeda guarantees is waiting for its martyrs (those 72 virgins in paradise). Islam is a religion imposed, they don't preach, proselytize or do any sort of missionary work. All along the perifery of the Muslim world, where they are in any way advancing (Nigeria, Sudan and other places in Africa) one finds those resisting their expansion get killed.

    This notion Islam is a religion that promotes peace is unadulterated baloney.


  8. #740
    Lobotomized Angry Citizen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,114
    Threads
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    10
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Spain, which was occupied by Muslims for 8 centuries saw all sorts of depravity visited upon them by the Moors, churches were destroyed and converted into mosques.
    I can't believe it. The government that instituted the infamous Spanish Inquisition, the government that fought the Reconquista purely on religious basis, THAT is the government you're defending -- all because the Spanish paid the Koran-specified tax. Your view is utterly deplorable.

    A man said to the universe:
    "Sir, I exist!"
    "However," replied the universe,
    "The fact has not created in me
    A sense of obligation."


    -- Stephen Crane

  9. #741
    Igneous Magma
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    694
    Threads
    2
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, for one, islam is based partly on christianity, I remember that the three most important prophets of islam was abraham, jesus, and muhammed. secondly, in case you're trying to argue that christianity spreads peace, what about the crusades? the wars between muslims and christians for turkey (though I think muslims started that one(not the crusades)), all the spanish quests to conquer america in the name of christ and the king? however, I do think that islam is a bit more violent than christianity, since its founder did fight a few wars.


  10. #742
    Volcanic Erupter
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,365
    Threads
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The crusades were hundreds of years ago, Christianity has evolved, there was a time when rulers sought to impose their faith by force on conquered people, but Christians found missionary work and preaching spread their faith better. Nowadays there is only one religion that still seeks to expand by force and we see its followers in action battling animists and Christians in Nigeria and the Sudan. Elsewhere the more fundamentalist among them seek to violently repress the slightest variation from their strict orthodoxy as seen in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and other places.

    It has been noted Islam emerged about 5 centuries after Christianity, some have suggested it is evolving in a similar fashion and now they are about where Christians were at the time of the crusades. In the Middle Ages, when Christianity was the age of Islam now, good Christians sought to die for their faith. They bore their religious symbols into battle and fought heathens to spread their faith, probably with the same conviction this would assure them generous reward from their maker as Islamic fundamentalist terrorists have today.

    But we can't wait a few centuries for Islam to evolve into a more tolerant faith, this development is necessary already. The world needs Islam to experience the institution of a centralized pontificate, their equivalent of the Reformation, a version of Protestantism, a struggle among offshooting reformed sects for followers through missionary work and finally some sort of ecumenical effort -but all at once in rapid sequence.

    Islamic clerics lack centralized oversight, they have no papacy, so they just compete with each other to sound the most righteous. Those ultra-fundamentalists draw big crowds and garner more support, their followers are encouraged to impose their cleric's preachings on others by force if necessary, that they will be rewarded in the afterlife for this.

    Anyone questioning the convictions of the most righteous runs the risk of being branded an apostate, so Muslim intellectuals are very cautious about discussing religion, but they will need to do this to bring about the changes that are necessary.

    Its a unique problem partially due to how Christianity evolved. We now live in a world infused with Christian values, our expectations for tolerance and accomodation are the result of how Christianity evolved to accept other faiths. We aren't going to accept a world where religious faith is imposed by force, so Islam will have to do without that bit on jihads and those virgins. Christianity never had this problem, it just grew out of it.


  11. #743
    Lobotomized Angry Citizen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,114
    Threads
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    10
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We aren't going to accept a world where religious faith is imposed by force, so Islam will have to do without that bit on jihads and those virgins. Christianity never had this problem, it just grew out of it.
    Then let Islam grow out of it. The only reason we give two shits about Islam is because Arabia sits on a vast barrel of oil.

    A man said to the universe:
    "Sir, I exist!"
    "However," replied the universe,
    "The fact has not created in me
    A sense of obligation."


    -- Stephen Crane

  12. #744
    Hot Lava
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    1,427
    Threads
    71
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "Then let Islam grow out of it. The only reason we give two shits about Islam is because Arabia sits on a vast barrel of oil."


    It's not the same to have 30 thousand men with swords and shields as to have some crazy bastards with possible nukes.

    And yes I agree about the oil part.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •